Treatment of Navalny Forcing Some but Far from All Russians to Recognize What Putin Regime has Been All Along, Inozemtsev Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, February 3 – Many Russians in the last few days have been acting as if the Navalny case reflects changes in the Putin regime, economist and commentator Vladislav Inozemtsev says; but in fact, all the recent events have done is to highlight many aspects of the Kremlin leader’s rule that have long been true.

            And that may be among the most important contributions the opposition figure has made, he says, thereby forcing enormous numbers of Russians to recognize that they have been living under a dictatorship for some time and that they need to take action if they are to escape that situation anytime soon (kasparov.ru/material.php?id=601AD30B4DB90).

            But at the same time, Inozemtsev says, many Russians still are not willing to recognize that reality, to see that what has been happening to Navalny is systemic rather than accidental. And the numbers of such people are large enough that Putin and his cronies may very well be able to hold on to power for another decade – and for the worst possible reason.

            That reason is this, the commentator says with obvious bitterness and regret. “Putin and his entourage did not ‘take’ power in this country. We ourselves gave it to him.” And any thinking about what those opposed to that system should do next must include that reality as part of such assessments and plans.

            “Navalny,” Navalny begins his commentary, “is undoubtedly a hero of our time,” and as such “criticizing him is senseless and in current (and often in earlier) conditions completely unethical.” He isn’t idea but he is a passionate man “acting according to his convictions. Such people are always needed and today in particular.”

            One can only hope that he will “survive in the unequal fight in which he has been drawn.

            What has been happening to him over the last few weeks has not “radically” changed the Putin system. It has only highlighted features that have been on view for those who have been paying attention for a decade or more.

            Those who say that the way in which Putin’s courts have treated Navalny marks the end of Russia as “a legal state” forget that these institutions have been acting that way since the beginning of Putin’s time in power. “A judicial system cannot die twice and so tears in this case are excessive.”

            That is true of other aspects of Russian reality under Putin. The Russian economy hasn’t declined just because of sanctions of the coronavirus. It began its decline long before 2014 because of the inability of the current Kremlin leadership to modernize the country and its willingness to rely on exporting natural resources alone.

            The massiveness of the Navalny protests is “really unique,” but they are not equivalent to what is happening in Belarus now. They are more like the Belarusian ones of 2010 in that they are not about disputing the results of an election that has rendered the regime illegitimate but a specific protest.

            As a result, one must conclude that “Putin’s delegitimization ahs not yet occurred and that this makes the position of the powers much firmer than in the Belarusian case now.”  Inozemtsev says that in his view, “the ability of the Kremlin to keep the situation under control is beyond doubt.”

            The reason lies not in the Navalny protests but in the fact hat “even today, a large part of our compatriots fears change and therefore is prepared to put up with the existing system.” Because that is the case, “the Kremlin today is not in the panic which is being ascribed to it.” It is even using the protests to “cleanse” the political field in advance of the Duma elections.

            The Putin regime can rely on force for some time. “It is impossible to sit on bayonets for a long time, but no one [in the Kremlin] has any such intention,” Inozemtsev says. “Putin isn’t young, he doesn’t intend to leave but he also is not interested in the vitality of the system after his death.”

            “Therefore,” the commentator says, his “task consists in holding out for another decade, and that task mis more than realistic” not because of the failures of Navalny but because so many Russians continue to back Putin just as they have done again and again either out of fear of change or other reasons.

            Everyone must keep in mind that “in the final analysis, Putin and his entourage did not ‘take’ power” in Russia. “We ourselves gave it to him.”